Poland's new political group

An interview with Joanna Kluzik-Rostkowska

[NOTE: We believe this is the first interview with Joanna Kluzik-Rostkowska, the leader of Poland is Most Important, Poland's newest political grouping, to appear in the international press. We're sure you'll let us know if we're wrong.]

ON ONE wall is a sketch of a kindly Pope John Paul II, kissing a baby; on the other, a calendar illustrated with Polish Air Force killing machines. The bookshelf includes an investigation into Falun Gong, and a copy of Naomi Klein's "The Shock Doctrine".

This is the office of Pawel Poncyljusz, a Polish conservative ideas man. I am here to meet his boss, Joanna Kluzik-Rostkowska, who was cast out from Jaroslaw Kaczynski's opposition Law and Justice (PiS) party last month, only to inspire a rebellion and launch a rival political movement, Polska jest Najważniejsza (PjN, usually rendered in English as "Poland is the Most Important").

Ms Kluzik ran Mr Kaczynski's impressive but ultimately failed presidential election bid this summer. Steering her leader away from his prickly national-conservative rhetoric, Ms Kluzik appeared to have turned Mr Kaczynski into a new man. The electorate liked what they saw; Mr Kaczynski's approval rating surged from the low 20s to the high 40s, almost winning him the contest.

But Ms Kluzik says that rather than thanking her for almost having taken him to victory, Mr Kaczynski blamed her for his narrow defeat. (Oddly, he also claimed that his temporary change of persona had been caused by prescription drugs.)

Mr Kaczynski's campaign slogan was "Poland is the Most Important". By appropriating the phrase for her new party, Ms Kluzik is staking the audacious claim that it was she, not Mr Kaczynski, that almost won the presidency for PiS. "It's not about nationalism, it's about the country being more important than the petty squabbles of politicians", she says. "I really want to end these bad emotions in Polish politics."

After PiS's poor showing in the recent local elections, speculation is rife over a successor to Mr Kaczynski. The smart money is on Zbigniew Ziobro, a hardliner and the scourge of Poland's liberal media.

“This isn't really my coup, this is a case of a disputed succession,” Ms Kluzik says. “Kaczynski has chosen Ziobro as a successor without the consent of the party, so now is the right time to start a new one. There are many people in Law and Justice who won't be intimidated by Ziobro and refuse to have anything to do with any political extreme.”

The new party includes among its members Michal Kaminski, the leader of the European Conservative and Reformists group in the European Parliament, of which the British Conservative Party is the biggest national constituent. Mr Kaminski, who was accused in Britain of anti-semitism last year, says he left PiS because it was "being taken over by the far right".

Ms Kluzik sounds happy about her European Parliament allies, saying she is inspired by the centrism of David Cameron's Conservative Party, as well his emphasis on “the family”. Asked to explain what that phrase means to her, Ms Kluzik expresses her fears that Poland's declining population could cause a crisis in the national-insurance system.

The 46-year-old Ms Kluzik is married with three children, and makes breakfast for them each day before setting off for parliament. Her family roots are in Katowice, the southern city of heroic coal-miners whose strikes in the 1980s brought Polish communism to its knees. One of her grandparents was German; she declines to talk about her parents.

As a teenager in the 1970s, she says, she obsessed over military histories while her friends read romantic fiction. The last book she read was about the Battle of Monte Cassino, in which Poles, British, Americans and others fought shoulder-to-shoulder against the Nazis. She studied journalism and politics at the University of Warsaw, and says her formative experiences were with an “underground newspaper” during the Solidarity revolution. She went on to work as a war correspondent in Lebanon, Bosnia and Chechnya, where she says she was nearly killed.

During the short-lived PiS-led coalition government of 2006-07, Ms Kluzik served as labour and social policy minister. “That is when I had my showdown with the hard right,” she says. “I was fighting for anti-discrimination legislation. I am talking, among other things, about minorities' rights and womens' rights. [Roman] Giertych [of the Catholic nationalist League of Polish Families, a coalition partner] demanded Kaczynski fire me because I was too open-minded.” Such rows led to the collapse of the government and its replacement, after elections, by Donald Tusk's Civic Platform, which remains in office today.

Many analysts believe that Mr Tusk has been happy to use the bogeyman of Mr Kaczynski as an excuse to go slow on economic reform. It is certainly true that most reformers fear a return of the statist-minded PiS to government more than they do Civic Platform sluggishness. But following the local elections, that excuse is starting to wear thin. With PiS flailing, PjN stands ready to provide a different style of opposition.

In an open letter to Mr Kaczynski published this week, Ms Kluzik complained about the “weak and indolent government of the Civic Platform”. This phrase will appeal to the segment of the electorate that has given the government its support for want of a reformist alternative. Esteemed Polish economists, like Krzysztof Rybinski, who recently expressed his concern over Poland's slow pace of reform, are rumoured to be in talks with the new party. Lech Walesa has voiced his support. Some even tip Ms Kluzik as a future prime minister. A general election must be held by next autumn, during Poland's presidency of the European Union. To avoid this, the government may call a snap vote this spring.

If Kluzik's enemies in Law and Justice were the "Ziobroites", her core support comes from the so-called "Museumite" faction, a an erudite grouping connected to a new museum in Warsaw dedicated to the 1944 uprising against the Nazis, a historical event that was subjected to decades of misrepresentation by the communists, and neglected in the West.

Such use of history is often criticised by western leftists who draw links between PiS's nationalism, Catholicism, anti-communism and the pre-war anti-semitic politician Roman Dmowski.

Adam Bielan, another PiS rebel to have joined the new party, refutes these allegations: "We're the heirs of [Jozef] Pilsudski, the great Polish leader who... was a great friend to Ukrainians and Jews. There is zero tolerance in our party for anti-Semitism."

I put it to Ms Kluzik that she has not yet given voters a reason not to believe that behind her pleasant, unthreatening demeanour lies a staunch conservativism no different from Mr Kaczynski's. What, for example, are her views on abortion, or civil partnership for homosexuals?

"I am a politician and I have to consider what the majority of public opinion stands for," she replies. "The overwhelming majority of women in Poland want to maintain the incumbent regulation, which is a moderate solution between pro-life and pro-choice extremes. I am on the record as a champion of non-discrimination against minorities." There is no apparent policy difference with Mr Kaczynski here. But the presentation is certainly more sophisticated.

Could it be that Ms Kluzik is in the closet, a secret liberal playing the role of a conservative? Asked if she goes to church on Sundays, she replies: "That is a very private matter."

It is hard not to notice that this (PJN) party came to existence in the wake of failed presidential bid by Law and Justice directed by Ms.Kluzik. There is only two ways to look at that fact. One way portrayed above and simply a PR spin for and by Ms.Kluzik where one is lead to believe that she supposedly succeed by "almost having taken him to victory" when speaking about Mr.Kaczynski's presidential bid. Another and a realistic one is to simply understand that Ms.Kluzik and her strategy completely failed during recent presidential election in Poland. Certainly, it is not a revelation but only age old prudence to realize that "almost" does not cut it in real life and certainly does not cut it in real politics either... It takes a serious naivete to agree with Ms.Kluzik's claim and take her failure as her success.

Ms.Kluzik's subjectivity aside one cannot help but see very clearly her consistent naivete in the claims she is making. Classic example from her statement: "I really want to end these bad emotions in Polish politics" That sounds touchy and nice but has zero correlation with reality. Politics is emotional because it is done by and for emotional human beings and it will stay that way as long as human beings will be human beings.

Voicing sound bites and redundant emotional cliches as Ms.Kluzik's does hardly will pass as a serious program or inciting vision for the party and its members and so much less for the citizens of the country. I can only wish Poland real leaders with real vision and not opportunists that try to catch every side breeze in their patchy and crudely made sails...

I am keeping my fingers crossed for Poland is Most Important. Nonetheless, as someone in Poland has noted - there is a problem with Poland is Most Important. It consists mainly of the PR people. The result - there is no programe, no party yet, but the media are full of it.

It looks to me that finally there is a political party in Poland that represents a new generation in politics. If they will carefully pick new members they might be able to pull it off. Poland needs desparately a serious, sensible opposition party and it has to come from the ruins of the Law and Justice. I wish them well.

Mrs Kluzik, in a TV interview, expressed an opinion that a government bureaucrat is more important that a small businessman, because without the bureaucrat issuing a permit the businessman would not be able to run a business. I think this illustrates her political views better than the above interview, which is simply a PR exercise. The socialist line taken by the current Polish political elite is unlikely to be altered by politicians like Mrs Kluzik and Poland (as the rest of Europe) will continue to go deeper into debt.

"The Economist" also writes the following curious passage:

"The last book she read was about the Battle of Monte Cassino, in which Poles, British, Americans and others fought shoulder-to-shoulder against the Nazis"

Could the author explain who is this nation of "Nazis" Poles, British and Americans were fighting against?! I think, if my knowledge of history serves, the "Nazis" were actually Germans. The lived in the country called Germany, which at that time was ruled by National Socialist Party of Germany (in short NSDAP). Their leader was a fellow called Adolf Hitler who, by the way became the German Chancellor as a result of democratic elections.

If "The Economist" wants to retain credibility it should quote historical facts properly. It would be far more correct to state that Poles, British and American were fighting German socialists.

I respect historians in Poland, like Mr Komorowski, Mr Tusk, Mr Michnik, Mr Kuron, Mr Kapuscinski, Mr Bartoszewski, etc. The history of Poland has almost every lesson in it. I learn a lot more about politics and political philosophy from the Polish history than from the Bible:

The constructive-rationalist interpretation of centrism is broad and vague, involving a number of conflicting thoughts. Imagine the chaotic era of the 17th century, when even the moderate Chancellor Stanislaw Zolkiewski could not tame the fanatic King Zygmunt III, later Ground Crown Hetman Niedźwiedzia Łapa Potocki ran wild attacking Cossacks and Jerzy Sebastian Lubomirski, a libertarian politician, thought of himself as a centrist who believed the species of ‘balance’ he advocated was the most important. This balance does not necessarily include efforts to build a public consensus but tends to fall into being too pushy and intrusive. It is not a coincidence that Ms Kulzik-Rostkowski described her idea as Pilsudskism. This corresponds with my criticism of him for bulldozing people – inside or outside Poland – into accepting his goodwill. Now you may have noticed that this is also a constructive-rationalist approach that would always antagonise a considerable number of people after all. Ms Kulzik-Rostkowski may be an honest person, though.

On the other hand, the evolutional-rationalist interpretation of centrism is compact and clear, consisting of a substantial consensus on the society. In other words, to work hard to build a consensus is a crucial part of this thought, committing to praxeology, especially the notion of temporary discounting, as a central factor of macroeconomics and national politics. Imagine the era of the 16th century, when Jan Zamoyski was the Chancellor. I do not have to write much, because Norman Davies writes about the then success and fall of the Golden Liberty, “…in 1667, that other great rebel, Jerzy Lubomirski lay dying. He complained of a headache. ‘Those that live by the head’, he sighed, ‘must die by the head.’ It was a fitting comment on the state of the Republic to whose discomfiture he had so conspicuously contributed. This Republic, with its fine ideals of unanimity and personal freedom, was run on the most delicate understanding between king and citizens. If it was to work at all, it had to be led by intelligent men. It had no reserves of power, no means of coercing the unreasonable rebel. When intelligence gave way to brute force, it threatened to collapse.” A brute force is always mobilised by hot money, or capital inflow or external debts. It does not matter who own claims – foreigners or fellow countrymen. Only debts matter.

In politics, I do not think the centuries-old distinction among left, centre and right is appropriate but quite often misleading. I instead tend to use Hayek’s terms – constructive rationalism and evolutionary rationalism. (The biggest difference between PjN and PO is that while the former is likened to the ‘old’ Tories the latter to the ‘old’ Whigs during the 18th century. Today, Britain has not a political party that represents Whiggism, or evolutionary rationalism, any more).

"...I totally disagree with you. The campaign fashioned by Kluzik and team was very successful."

Your disagreement is noticed but it is simply unwarranted, unfounded and unrealistic. Presidential elections are not polls. Presidential elections are decisive and decisive in many ways. There is only one winner and that winner takes it all. To bring it home for you and the reader an example...You would have really hard time to sell your perception and your definition of success to John McCain, his staff not to mention his party.Ditto.

There may be six alternatives thinkable, each of which I add my brief assessment as well:

1. PjN stays independent:
Possible as an alternative populist, or self-styled moderate conservative, party if it is able to absorb dissident PiS members, probably after Mr Ziobro succeeds Mr Kaczynski.

2. PjN joins PO:
Quite unthinkable. The current PO board would never accept PjN within the meaningful timespan. PO has been making its utmost effort to avoid populism, considering it as a form of extremism. This is the reason why PO dropped their initial idea of forming a ruling coalition with PiS. Although it does not accept a group from the existing extremist parties, it might accept individuals on occasions as it did with Mr Sikorski.

3. PjN joins PSL:
Possible, but not plausible. In that case, PSL must determine to part from PO whereas it is unlikely that the agrarian party would become a large, nationwide political power like PO in any case. It would become a Bohemian in the rapidly changing rural societies as another mohair populist party and be marginalised for ever.

4. PjN joins SLD:
Possible, but not plausible. It would first appear that syndicalists and mohairs were coming back to SLD. This, however, would mitigate SLD’s power of choosing political thoughts, driving it back to the 19th century style Marxist socialism. SLD would neither be able to cooperate with PO nor be considered as a serious political party any more.

5. PjN joins a libertarian party:
Quite possible and quite plausible. PJN may be hollow in policy-making, but both parties would be extremely flashy. The libertarian party with PJN will gain broad supports from mohairs with rosaries by promising statist approaches in personal affairs and investment bankers on Ferraris by promising hurried economic reforms. In economic policy, they would pursue a New Classical approaches as an extremely strong tool to advocate hasty deregulations, compromising with a welfare state model. It would resemble the British method of policy-making, Tory or Labour. (LDP is not old Whigs any more). Therefore, I regard libertarianism a form of socialism. The new populist-libertarian collaboration would be formidably strong at elections as they always have both committed votes and money. They will cry out loud ‘Change!’ and ‘Yes, we can!’ (or ‘Yes, we Kan!’ like its Japanse counterpart. Ref my posts of Jul 8th 2010 4:24 GMT and Jul 8th 2010 4:43 GMT addressed to Layos: http://www.economist.com/blogs/easternapproaches/2010/07/eastern_approac... ) at elections, and they might win landslide, more so if SLD joins them to form a thorough constructive-rationalist ‘centrist’ electoral confederation against the ‘centrist’ evolutionary-rationalist PO. Only after it has come into power would destructive contradictions characteristic to constructive-rationalism emerge from inside. I agree with Mr Gowin on Mr Parikot (http://wyborcza.pl/Polityka/1,103835,8746022,Reformy_nie_musza_byc_trudn...). Mr Parikot may stay marginal to the eyes of the voters, but he is not the only libertarian. Libertarians will sooner or later form an extremely strong political group should PO still hesitate to implement the reform after the next parliamentary elections. (I regard the period until the next parliamentary elections as still a moratorium for PO. Also, it is very interesting that Mr Tusk is strongly advocating reducing state subventions for political parties for a couple of years from 2011, when the reform will have reached its full scale, whereas the existing populists tend to spend much of theirs on their PR activities).

6. PjN re-joins PiS:
Possible, and more so after Mr Kaczynski resigns as the leader. If realised, members from PjN may gain the initiative within PiS. The whole of the current hubbubs would turn out to have virtually been a coup de grace to Mr Kacynski only.

Kluzik-Rostowska was until this autumn an ultra loyal leading PiS politician. How otherwise would she have been chosen to lead Kaczynski's bid for the Presidency? He subsequently made her and her "spin-doctor" electoral team the scapegoats for failure. Coming second in politics gets one nowhere!

So, like several other PiS politicians in the past (they all failed) she is attempting to set up a new political group: "hard core nationalistic conservatism with a human face", without a programme simply because the policies will be the same as existing PiS ones, just presented with a very glib non-aggressive PR packaging prepared by her fellow "spin-doctors".

The fact is that the ruling PO party does need a constructive opposition to give it the continuing proverbial "kich-up-the-backside" it richly deserves. Whether Kluzik-Roztowska and her supporters prove capable of doing so is another matter.

I suppose your note at the top was the blogger/journo equivalent of "First!";)
Anyway, not only is the 'smart money' on Ziobro, the only money is. Kaczynski has alienated and ejected all other half-charismatic, competent PiS politicians over the past 5 years that Ziobro basically wins by default. Simply put, there are no other pretenders to the Kaczynski crown. PiS is now Kaczynski, Ziobro, and uncharismatic yes men (and a couple of women). Unless PiS moves back toward the centre, PJN could doom them to life on the fringes.
As for the possibility of a snap general election, it is hard to believe the chance is high since Tusk et al constantly deny it. It also looks like the PO's precise strategy will be to highlight the EU meetings. The elections will have to be held in October, and it is not hard to see a European Council sitting -- with Tusk hobnobbing with EU bigwigs -- timed to be very close to actual voting.
PJN does seem to have created a lot of hope just be reading the comments. Though the party will still have problems financing itself and remaining in the media for another year, I agree it has a chance. But what does it believe? I might have liked more of that in the interview. Is it just 'PiS light' or is it actually offering more than platitudes.
And, DespevilleX, I totally disagree with you. The campaign fashioned by Kluzik and team was very successful. Remember that J. Kaczynski polled at like 5% in January and ended up getting 47%. He was the most distrusted politician in Poland with the highest negative electorate before he ran. Moreover, before his untimely death, L. Kaczynski never polled above 24% or so.
Cheers.

@DespevilleX
I do understand your zero-sum point that any presidential election campaign that doesn't lead to victory is by definition unsuccessful. But considering who Jaroslaw Kaczynski is, his huge negative electorate and his gratingly prickly self, 47% was oustanding. For all those who watched the campaign closely, it was really well handled. If Komorowski's campaign was half as good, he would have won outright in the first round.

PR prowess is in fact one of PJN's potential big advantages: they have the campaign teams that won PiS the 2005 parliamentary election, won Lech the 2005 presidential election and were almost able to give Jaroslaw a victory several months ago. If one follows the daily politics, they have designed a strategy to be present or give one talking point for every 24-hour news cycle. Savvy. Will it work? We'll see.

Polish media - have bad opinion. Arguably, some incidents are blown out of proportion, others are hushed. Polish media are oligopoly of state mieda (controlled by PO) and several big companies (known to be involved in economic deals allowed by politicians, especially in Warsaw city). Why should they be interested in providing publicity to PJN instead of eg. next circus of mr Palikot who also does a good job in attacking Kaczynski?

Funds: In Poland, parties whoch got to the parlament are subsidisied by the State. New party would have no funding. How it plans to organize a campaign?

Currently center-right Civic Patform hardly faces any serious opposition - left and right are both covered under two huge gravestones of declining parties - SLD and PiS.

In normal circumstances left-wing SLD would be a viable alternative to center-right PO, unfortunatelly the party acts in often very peculiar and annoying manner, probably betraying its chaotic leadership and rather childish leader Mr. Napieralski.

The other serious (post-communist past is less important) problems they are facing is first that center-right in general 'stole' certain left-wing ideas and is implementing it and second that the SLD remains large, bloated organisation which has to demand seats for their members and supporters.

The first can easily be represented by the latest smoking ban. The idea was supported by both PO and PiS and actually only left-wing SLD demanded more lenient regulation. Much different than you could expect from a modern left-wing party - their action infuriated many supporters who would expect something completely opposite.

The second is the consequence of the defeats the party suffered from the time of the Rywin corruption scandal which brought down the Miller government and reduced support for the SLD by over a half.

SLD seems unable to deal with any of those problems, but is still strong enough to discourage most loyal left-wing supporters from voting for smaller parties from the political left.

PiS obviously is the second gravestone which occupied roughtly 1/4 of political scene and manages to eliminate any opposition from right-wing parties.

Neither rdical left nor radical, ultra-right parties were ever popular in Poland (even the now deceased ultra-conservative League of Polish Families should be counted as one) so there is pretty no space left for any serious party unless one of the biggest three - PO, PiS and SLD crumbles.

Current situation finally allows some initiatives to be started - Mr. Palikot's libertarian movement and PJN will both attempt to find support and have almost a year to achieve it.

Unfortunatelly both suffer from serious problems.
Mr.Palikot - a smart and relatively popular politician probably hoped for too much - for a libertarian, quite anti-clerical wave of support from young urbanite voters fed up with political strenght of the Catholic Church and weakness of center-left parties and organisations. It seems he will fail - Poles are voting not only for people they support, but for people who are likely to be able to implement certain ideas or stop certain ideas from being implemented by their political opponents while anti-clericalism is often only vocal and suddenly disappears on Sunday.

PJN speaks what a decent conservative party is supposed to say. Unfortuanatelly they suffer from one, key factor - lack of credibility.
Let's face it - they are former PiS politicians who supported Jarosław Kaczyński in his quest for power, supported a year ago, two years ago and when his government was in power. Together they've crossed not one line, but several - each more humilating than a previous one.
To survive in the party you had to evolve a very flexible backbone or get rid off this unnecessary thing altogether.
PJN happens to include several people from the closest circles of the Law and Justice and it will be remembered by many; especially the campaign when the people (several PR experts) attempted to smuggle a... Cobblepot for the president of Poland.
In other words for several weeks they've played the country 'like a harp from Hell'.

Will those, cheated voters be able to trust them again?
Or are they capable to rip off a sizable wing from half-deceased Law and Justice thus pushing it harder towards the wall of political margin where only madness prospers?

That is a good question, but here is another.

Recently PiS maintains its support mainly from small towns and villages, but the second powerbase might find itself under a siege from unexpected direction - that is from the PSL.

There is more than one player which might grow from the meltdown of PiS.

In any case PJN seems more predictable than PiS which might finally remove the need to invite to media and quote people like ... (a list of 40+ names follows) so the entire first rank of PiS.

I dare say for that alone some people will be thankfull.

If they are capable to form a civilised opposition to the Civic Platform is still a question and the coming year should help answering it.

Certainly not one or a series of interviews, especially with former spin-doctors of PiS present in PJN.